Re: [PATCH v7 08/14] arm64: numa: Use pr_fmt()

Will Deacon
2016-08-26T12:54:28Z

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 03:44:47PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:
> From: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
>
> Use pr_fmt to prefix kernel output, and remove duplicated msg
> of NUMA turned off.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> index d97c6e2..7b73808 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
> * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> */
>
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "numa: " fmt

Shouldn't this be uppercase for consistency with the existing code and
the code in places like drivers/of/of_numa.c?

> #include <linux/acpi.h>
> #include <linux/bootmem.h>
> #include <linux/memblock.h>
> @@ -38,10 +40,9 @@ static __init int numa_parse_early_param(char *opt)
> {
> if (!opt)
> return -EINVAL;
> - if (!strncmp(opt, "off", 3)) {
> - pr_info("%s\n", "NUMA turned off");
> + if (!strncmp(opt, "off", 3))
> numa_off = true;
> - }
> +
> return 0;
> }
> early_param("numa", numa_parse_early_param);
> @@ -110,7 +111,7 @@ static void __init setup_node_to_cpumask_map(void)
> set_cpu_numa_node(cpu, NUMA_NO_NODE);
>
> /* cpumask_of_node() will now work */
> - pr_debug("NUMA: Node to cpumask map for %d nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
> + pr_debug("Node to cpumask map for %d nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -145,13 +146,13 @@ int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 end)
>
> ret = memblock_set_node(start, (end - start), &memblock.memory, nid);
> if (ret < 0) {
> - pr_err("NUMA: memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] failed to add on node %d\n",
> + pr_err("memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] failed to add on node %d\n",
> start, (end - 1), nid);
> return ret;
> }
>
> node_set(nid, numa_nodes_parsed);
> - pr_info("NUMA: Adding memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] on node %d\n",
> + pr_info("Adding memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] on node %d\n",
> start, (end - 1), nid);
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -166,19 +167,18 @@ static void __init setup_node_data(int nid, u64 start_pfn, u64 end_pfn)
> void *nd;
> int tnid;
>
> - pr_info("NUMA: Initmem setup node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> - nid, start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT,
> - (end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
> + pr_info("Initmem setup node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> + nid, start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, (end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
>
> nd_pa = memblock_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
> nd = __va(nd_pa);
>
> /* report and initialize */
> - pr_info("NUMA: NODE_DATA [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> + pr_info(" NODE_DATA [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",

Why are you adding leading whitespace?

> nd_pa, nd_pa + nd_size - 1);
> tnid = early_pfn_to_nid(nd_pa >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> if (tnid != nid)
> - pr_info("NUMA: NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
> + pr_info(" NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);

Same here.

> node_data[nid] = nd;
> memset(NODE_DATA(nid), 0, sizeof(pg_data_t));
> @@ -235,8 +235,7 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
> numa_distance[i * numa_distance_cnt + j] = i == j ?
> LOCAL_DISTANCE : REMOTE_DISTANCE;
>
> - pr_debug("NUMA: Initialized distance table, cnt=%d\n",
> - numa_distance_cnt);
> + pr_debug("Initialized distance table, cnt=%d\n", numa_distance_cnt);
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -257,20 +256,20 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
> void __init numa_set_distance(int from, int to, int distance)
> {
> if (!numa_distance) {
> - pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: distance table not allocated yet\n");
> + pr_warn_once("Warning: distance table not allocated yet\n");
> return;
> }
>
> if (from >= numa_distance_cnt || to >= numa_distance_cnt ||
> from < 0 || to < 0) {
> - pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: node ids are out of bound, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
> + pr_warn_once("Warning: node ids are out of bound, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
> from, to, distance);
> return;
> }
>
> if ((u8)distance != distance ||
> (from == to && distance != LOCAL_DISTANCE)) {
> - pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: invalid distance parameter, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
> + pr_warn_once("Warning: invalid distance parameter, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
> from, to, distance);
> return;
> }
> @@ -297,7 +296,7 @@ static int __init numa_register_nodes(void)
> /* Check that valid nid is set to memblks */
> for_each_memblock(memory, mblk)
> if (mblk->nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || mblk->nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
> - pr_warn("NUMA: Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> + pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> mblk->nid, mblk->base,
> mblk->base + mblk->size - 1);
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -368,9 +367,10 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
> struct memblock_region *mblk;
>
> if (numa_off)
> - pr_info("NUMA disabled\n"); /* Forced off on command line. */
> - pr_info("NUMA: Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
> - 0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);
> + pr_warn("NUMA turned off by user\n"); /* Forced off on command line. */

Why are you changing the string? What's wrong with "NUMA turned off" like
we had before?

Will